The price of oil - Christmas comes early!

[felice]

This ought to be the ideal time to drastically raise carbon taxes all over the world. People won't whine as much when the oil prices are at a historical low point.

That would be sensible, yes.

[Fez]

This ought to be the ideal time to drastically raise carbon taxes all over the world. People won't whine as much when the oil prices are at a historical low point.

At the very least now would be the time to raise the gas tax in the US.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Commodore,

True to a limited extent. If the environment is altered by human activities to the extent it is no longer condusive to supporting large human populations bad days will result, rapidly.

[Free Northman Reborn]

As always, most people are unable to visualize the technological leaps of tomorrow.

Just look at the world a mere 120 years ago compared to today. The reliance on fossil fuels will go the same way that the horse and cart went as a primary means of transport. Once fusion is mastered there will be endless clean energy for the next million years or so. And that is before even more exotic sources of energy are mastered.

If fusion becomes a financially viable source of energy production 50 years from now, fossil fuel pollution will largely disappear from the planet. Within a few decades the air will be as clear as it was before the 20th century started.

So to the alarmists who want us to sell those SUV's and immediately buy Prius's instead, you just need to have a little more vision, then your blood pressure will drop a tad. We just need oil to get us through the next 50 years at most. Maybe even 25 years will do it.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

FNR,

That's a big assumption. I like optimism but optimism tempered by realistic assumptions.

[Fez]

The problem with that is that we have no idea when that technological advance will occur. If it doesn't come quite as soon as we need, and we have no alternate plan, we're fucked.

[Larry of the Lawn]

As always, most people are unable to visualize the technological leaps of tomorrow.

Just look at the world a mere 120 years ago compared to today. The reliance on fossil fuels will go the same way that the horse and cart went as a primary means of transport. Once fusion is mastered there will be endless clean energy for the next million years or so. And that is before even more exotic sources of energy are mastered.

If fusion becomes a financially viable source of energy production 50 years from now, fossil fuel pollution will largely disappear from the planet. Within a few decades the air will be as clear as it was before the 20th century started.

So to the alarmists who want us to sell those SUV's and immediately buy Prius's instead, you just need to have a little more vision, then your blood pressure will drop a tad. We just need oil to get us through the next 50 years at most. Maybe even 25 years will do it.

Right, why put your money towards alternative energy sources instead of just chugging along on petroleum until some egghead comes up with magic?

Because obviosuly the fastest way to get egghead magic is too keep doing what we're doing. Not like taking money away from oil subsidies and investing in R& D would help.

[Cuellar]

One thing I've noticed that solar really becomes VERY viable depending on the interest rate charged for purchasing solar. Right now it is around 5%, and the government could easily offer FHA style loans to drive the interest rate to 2% or so.

Quick math - a $35K solar array produces about $200 worth of solar energy per month in LA. At 5%, the monthly payment for the array is $231, so you are relying on the cost of energy increasing or a government subsidy (tax credit of 30%) in order to put up the array. Eliminate the government subsidy, but have 2% financing, and viola now the array costs $177 a month, meaning immediately and for the next 20 years you will see a $13 a month savings on the array - no subsidy required.

Think about the total economics, with $400B in loans (less than the cost of the F35 shitty project), you could outfit 11.5M houses with solar with that cash.

[Commodore]

The problem with that is that we have no idea when that technological advance will occur. If it doesn't come quite as soon as we need, and we have no alternate plan, we're fucked.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_signal

[Swordfish]

One thing I've noticed that solar really becomes VERY viable depending on the interest rate charged for purchasing solar. Right now it is around 5%, and the government could easily offer FHA style loans to drive the interest rate to 2% or so.

Quick math - a $35K solar array produces about $200 worth of solar energy per month in LA. At 5%, the monthly payment for the array is $231, so you are relying on the cost of energy increasing or a government subsidy (tax credit of 30%) in order to put up the array. Eliminate the government subsidy, but have 2% financing, and viola now the array costs $177 a month, meaning immediately and for the next 20 years you will see a $13 a month savings on the array - no subsidy required.

Think about the total economics, with $400B in loans (less than the cost of the F35 shitty project), you could outfit 11.5M houses with solar with that cash.

Not exactly. My electric bill has never been above $25. So it really depends on the household. Do people in LA really routinely pay above $200 for electricity per month?

[Larry of the Lawn]

Not exactly. My electric bill has never been above $25. So it really depends on the household. Do people in LA really routinely pay above $200 for electricity per month?

What state do you live in? Mines minimum fifty bucks a month just to be connected.

[Shryke]

As always, most people are unable to visualize the technological leaps of tomorrow.

Except apparently you? Cause that's what your entire argument is based on.

The assumption that we will totally figure the problem out is a fallacy. Maybe we won't.

[Shryke]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_signal

I'm not sure what you think this answer means, but every type of argument I can imagine that could be made from this link is missing the point.

[Cuellar]

Not exactly. My electric bill has never been above $25. So it really depends on the household. Do people in LA really routinely pay above $200 for electricity per month?

Probably not unless they live in a bigger house and run AC a ton. I wouldn't say EVERYONE in the country NEEDS SOLAR NOW, but if you take a chunk of households that use that much and replace their grid use, it can make a huge impact on overall usage.

[Swordfish]

What state do you live in? Mines minimum fifty bucks a month just to be connected.

Oregon. We have cheap, cheap electric, I knwo, but $200 sounds nuts. I never paid that much in any state that I've lived in.

Probably not unless they live in a bigger house and run AC a ton. I wouldn't say EVERYONE in the country NEEDS SOLAR NOW, but if you take a chunk of households that use that much and replace their grid use, it can make a huge impact on overall usage.

Sure. But the original post was about driving down cost through economies of scale, with the baseline of $200 a month being used.

I'm not anti solar, but i don't think there's anyway to scale it that makes that math really work very well. So generally the reasons for doing will need to be something other than saving money. And I'm not sure individual cells on rooftops is really the best way to go in most parts of the country.

[mcbigski]

As always, most people are unable to visualize the technological leaps of tomorrow.

Just look at the world a mere 120 years ago compared to today. The reliance on fossil fuels will go the same way that the horse and cart went as a primary means of transport. Once fusion is mastered there will be endless clean energy for the next million years or so. And that is before even more exotic sources of energy are mastered.

If fusion becomes a financially viable source of energy production 50 years from now, fossil fuel pollution will largely disappear from the planet. Within a few decades the air will be as clear as it was before the 20th century started.

So to the alarmists who want us to sell those SUV's and immediately buy Prius's instead, you just need to have a little more vision, then your blood pressure will drop a tad. We just need oil to get us through the next 50 years at most. Maybe even 25 years will do it.

We don't even need fusion. Fission has no CO2 emissions, and hopefully better batteries are around the corner to replace hydrocarbons for ground vehicles. (Hydrocarbons for flight still make a lot sense, but then with enough cheap electricity we could synthesize what we needed and remain carbon neutral.) "God bless nuclear power, the cleanest and safest form of energy there is!"

Though TPTB seem to want to limit nuclear fission, despite it's green potential. If only there were a way to burn ignorance for fuel!

[Shryke]

"Better batteries" is everyone's dream. Would solve SO many issues.

It seems to be a rather intractable problem though.

[Fragile Bird]

Two years ago I was thinking that we would never see gasoline dip down below $1.00 a litre, and it was fantastic to fill my car's gas tank at $0.999. Watching it drift down, hell, plunge down, didn't really drift, filling up at $0.899 was fantastic as well. By then I was eager to see how low it could go.

Yesterday I filled up the car at $0.819, and I'm certain oil prices are going to fall some more and I will see gasoline prices in the 70 cents range. While oil producers are licking their wounds, this has to be good for the economy.

There are 3.785 litres in a US gallon, meaning we pay $3.099, but with the fall of the Canadian dollar associated with the drop in oil prices, let's call it an 83 cent dollar, an American would pay $2.572 for a gallon of gas. I think the tourism season is going to be very strong this year.

[Lord of the Vale]

No, not if you are A norwegian the unemployment rate will rise to 3,5%